"Secret U.S. government cables show a stunning willingness by senior Canadian officials to appease American demands (more here) for a U.S.-style copyright law here. The documents describe Canadian officials as encouraging American lobbying efforts. They also cite cabinet minister Maxime Bernier raising the possibility of showing U.S. officials a draft bill before tabling it in Parliament. The cables, from the U.S. Embassy in Ottawa, even have a policy director for then industry minister Tony Clement suggesting it might help U.S. demands for a tough copyright law if Canada were placed among the worst offenders on an international piracy watch list. Days later, the U.S. placed Canada alongside China and Russia on the list." Unbelievable. Suddenly I understand why the SFPD had no qualms about acting as henchmen for Apple goons to violate someone's constitutional rights. If a government is messed up, it only makes sense this is reflected in the corporate policies of its prime corporations.

Saying that I also don't care for people who steal. I don't care if it is a candy, a pen, or a grape off the store counter or an apple in a field. It is all stealing to me. How can any so call civilized person think that stealing movies and music is any way to live. I guess some people just get wrapped up in theft and they can't help themselves.

Learn to say this more often. "Bad angel get off of my shoulder." Cause that is what seems to be driving the want for stolen movies and music and software.

Sorry, but it's not stealing. I don't agree with copyright infringement, but saying that it is stealing is simply wrong. When people copy a cd, they are not taking away the original. And spare me the "but they're taking away the opportunity of a sale" nonsense, because by that reasoning we might as well call it murder. The arguement would be that "they are killing a potential sale" or "piracy is killing the music industry".

"Sorry, but it's not stealing. I don't agree with copyright infringement"

I concur with your post.

However I have a tangential question for you and others:

While copying is wrong in our society, do you believe it needs to be wrong in all societies?

In theory, social norms and laws could simply entitle the public to copy works as a fundamental right. Would those who've grown up against this backdrop be at a real loss compared to us? (note I'm deliberately avoiding the topic of migrating from a copyright society to a non-copyright one).

Would there still be artists?
I think so, even if not the ones who do it for money only.

Would there still be performers?
I think it would probably encourage even more live performances than today, and people would be willing to spend more to see them.

Would there still be films?
Well, it'd certainly change hollywood business models to say the least, but I believe independent film makers would still be around because they enjoy it - there would still be movie stars.

There are a lot more questions...but I'm just soliciting input on the "information wants to be free" philosophy.

Saying that I also don't care for people who steal. I don't care if it is a candy, a pen, or a grape off the store counter or an apple in a field. It is all stealing to me. How can any so call civilized person think that stealing movies and music is any way to live. I guess some people just get wrapped up in theft and they can't help themselves.

Learn to say this more often. "Bad angel get off of my shoulder." Cause that is what seems to be driving the want for stolen movies and music and software.

I don't want to start another big debate, but in case anyone new wanders in, the general argument made by people who aren't just in a frenzy of downloading is as follows:

- Theft deprives the original owner of a thing they already had
- Copyright infringement leaves their ownership intact and gives them an excuse to whine that every download must have been a lost sale (rather than potential word-of-mouth advertising as some people see it)
- Piracy is theft and murder on the high seas.

Do you remember the poeple from HADOPI ? Does are the people that worked on getting the 'three strikes out, you do not get any internet access anymore'-policy implemented in France. That is where these numbers come from.

Here is a Dutch article that describes/analyzes the numbers from the research of HADOPI where I got my information from:

People that download more/the most from an 'illegal source' are the same people that spend more/the most money on movies and music.

What does this probably mean ? People who have a real interrest in music/movies download have no problem paying for their music/movies, but if the music/movie industry does not provide them with the service they need, they will get it somewhere else.

This could for example mean people want to copy cassettes, cd's and mp3 from other people to sample things.

When they like it, they will buy the real CD (possibly because they downloaded quality might not have been as good) and go to a concert.

Or they want to watch a TV-series that is only available on TV in the US and they are in a country where Netflix or similair is not offered. They will use P2P to download it instead.

Fine, but don't forget to mention how the DMCA (etc.) are the tools of a massive campaign to steal from us.

Copyright was supposed to be a "we, the society, will grant you a limited, temporary protection, to encourage your activity of making works derivative of our culture, and to make you not fearful of broad distribution; in exchange, your derivatives will be assured to go into public domain after a reasonable delay, to become part of our greater cultural legacy others may in turn built upon" kind of deal.

This social deal has been completely perverted now, with how we'll be all long dead before current group of copyrighted works enters public domain. The protection terms get ridiculously prolonged exactly when the life is getting "faster" and publishing delays or distribution hurdles all but disappearing.

And how much are you willing to bet that the terms won't be prolonged again when Mickey Mouse will be again dangerously close to that scary, scary "PD moment"?